Re: Alternative to psql -c ? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From hubert depesz lubaczewski
Subject Re: Alternative to psql -c ?
Date
Msg-id CAKrjmhctDOxTcey3-QmFOrzeVZ2-q3OF3q12VSt2+OUzef5LKg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Alternative to psql -c ?  (James Le Cuirot <chewi@aura-online.co.uk>)
Responses Re: Alternative to psql -c ?
List pgsql-general
Perhaps you can explain what is the functionality you want to achieve, as I, for one, don't understand. Do you want transactions? Or not?

Also - I have no idea what "peer authentication" has to do with Pg gem - care to elaborate? The gem is for client, and authentication happens in server, so ... ?

depesz


On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 4:37 PM, James Le Cuirot <chewi@aura-online.co.uk> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jun 2014 10:24:53 -0400
Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 03:16:19PM +0100, James Le Cuirot wrote:
> > Same problem as stdin, the transactional behaviour is different.
> > There is the --single-transaction option but as the man page says...
> >
> > "If the script itself uses BEGIN, COMMIT, or ROLLBACK, this option
> > will not have the desired effects."
>
> Hmm.  I've _used_ transactions in such files, I'm pretty sure.  You
> don't need the --single-transaction setting for this, just do the
> BEGIN; and COMMIT; yourself.
>
> A

Sorry, you're missing the point. I'm trying not to alter the existing
behaviour of the Chef database cookbook which is used by countless
people to execute scripts big and small, with and without transactions.
If I just naively wrapped them all in BEGIN/COMMIT then it would
override any additional transactions within the scripts.

James


--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Andrew Sullivan
Date:
Subject: Re: Alternative to psql -c ?
Next
From: James Le Cuirot
Date:
Subject: Re: Alternative to psql -c ?